Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Ripsnort on August 02, 2000, 10:46:00 AM
-
You're sound asleep when you hear a thump outside your bedroom door. Half-awake, and nearly paralyzed with fear, you hear muffled whispers. At least two people have broken into your house and are moving your way. With your heart pumping, you reach down beside your bed and pick up your shotgun. You rack a shell into the chamber, then inch toward the door and open it.
In the darkness, you make out two shadows. One holds a weapon--it looks like a crowbar. When the intruder brandishes it as if to strike, you raise the shotgun and fire. The blast knocks both thugs to the floor. One writhes and screams while the second man crawls to the front door and lurches outside.
As you pick up the telephone to call police, you know you're in trouble. In your country, most guns were outlawed years before, and the few that are privately owned are so stringently regulated as to make them useless.Yours was never registered.
Police arrive and inform you that the second burglar has died. They arrest you for First Degree Murder and Illegal Possession of a Firearm.
When you talk to your attorney, he tells you not to worry: authorities will probably plea the case down to manslaughter. "What kind of sentence will I get?" you ask. "Only ten-to-twelve years," he replies, as if that's nothing. "Behave yourself, and you'll be out in seven." The next day, the shooting is the lead story in the local newspaper. Somehow, you're portrayed as an eccentric vigilante while the two men you shot are represented as choir boys. Their friends and relatives can't find an unkind word to say about them. Buried deep down in the article, authorities acknowledge that both "victims" have been arrested numerous times. But the next day's headline says it all:
"Lovable Rogue Son Didn't Deserve to Die."
The thieves have been transformed from career criminals into Robin Hood-type pranksters.
As the days wear on, the story takes wings. The national media picks it up, then the international media. The surviving burglar has become a folk hero. Your attorney says the thief is preparing to sue you, and he'll probably win.
The media publishes reports that your home has been burglarized several times in the past and that you've been critical of local police for their lack of effort in apprehending the suspects. After the last break-in, you told your neighbor that you would be prepared next time. The District
Attorney uses this to allege that you were lying in wait for the burglars.
A few months later, you go to trial. The charges haven't been reduced, as your lawyer had so confidently predicted. When you take the stand, your anger at the injustice of it all works against you.Prosecutors paint a picture of you as a mean, vengeful man.
It doesn't take long for the jury to convict you of all charges. The judge sentences you to life in prison.
This case really happened
***********************************
> > > On August 22, 1999, Tony Martin of Emneth, Norfolk,
> > > England, killed one
> > > burglar and wounded a second. In April, 2000, he
> > > was convicted and is now
> > > serving a life term.
> > >
> > > How did it become a crime to defend one's own life
> > > in the once-great
> > > British Empire?
> > >
> > > It started with the Pistols Act of 1903. This
> > > seemingly reasonable law
> > > forbade selling pistols to minors or felons and
> > > established that handgun
> > > sales were to be made only to those who had a
> > > license. The Firearms Act of
> > > 1920 expanded licensing to include not only handguns
> > > but all firearms
> > > except shotguns.
> > > Later laws passed in 1953 and 1967 outlawed the
> > > carrying of all shotguns.
> > >
> > > Momentum for total handgun confiscation began in
> > > earnest after the
> > > Hungerford mass shooting in 1987. Michael Ryan, a
> > > mentally disturbed man
> > > with a Kalashnikov rifle, walked down the streets
> > > shooting everyone he
> > > saw. When the smoke cleared,
> > > 17 people were dead.
> > >
> > > The British public, already de-sensitized by eighty
> > > years of "gun control",
> > > demanded even tougher restrictions. (The seizure of
> > > all privately owned
> > > handguns was the objective even though Ryan used a
> > > rifle.)
> > >
> > > Nine years later, at Dunblane, Scotland, Thomas
> > > Hamilton used a
> > > semi-automatic weapon to murder 16 children and a
> > > teacher at a public school.
> > >
> > > For many years, the media had portrayed all gun
> > > owners as mentally
> > > unstable, or worse, criminals. Now the press had a
> > > real kook with which to
> > > beat up law-abiding gun owners. Day after day, week
> > > after week, the media
> > > gave up all pretense of objectivity and demanded a
> > > total ban on all handguns.
> > >
> > > The Dunblane Inquiry, a few months later, sealed the
> > > fate of the few
> > > sidearms still owned by private citizens.
> > >
> > > During the years in which the British government
> > > incrementally took away
> > > most gun rights, the notion that a citizen had the
> > > right to armed
> > > self-defense came to be seen as vigilantism.
> > > Authorities refused to grant
> > > gun licenses to people who were threatened, claiming
> > > that self-defense was
> > > no longer considered a reason to own a gun.
> > > Citizens who shot burglars or
> > > robbers or rapists were charged while the real
> > > criminals were
> > > released. Indeed, after the Martin shooting, a
> > > police spokesman was quoted
> > > as saying, "We cannot have people take the law into
> > > their own hands."
> > >
> > > All of Martin's neighbors had been robbed numerous
> > > times, and several
> > > elderly people were severely injured in beatings by
> > > young thugs who had no
> > > fear of the consequences. Martin himself, a
> > > collector of antiques, had
> > > seen most of his collection trashed or stolen by
> > > burglars.
> > >
> > > When the Dunblane Inquiry ended, citizens who owned
> > > handguns were given
> > > three months to turn them over to local authorities.
> > > Being good British subjects, most people obeyed the
> > > law. The few who
> > > didn't were visited by police and threatened with
> > > ten-year prison sentences
> > > if they didn't comply.
> > >
> > > Police later bragged that they'd taken nearly
> > > 200,000 handguns from private
> > > citizens.
> > >
> > > How did the authorities know who had handguns?
> > >
> > > The guns had been registered and licensed. Kinda
> > > like cars.
Can America be far behind?
------------------
Ripsnort(-rip1-)
=CO= VMF-323 ~Death Rattlers~
"Know your limits and then go beyond.."
Click here for VMF-323 Death Rattlers info (http://Ripsnort60.tripod.com/vmf323inquirer.html)
Click here for 15th Panzer info (http://Ripsnort60.tripod.com/panzerinquirer.html)
(http://ripsnort60.tripod.com/ripsnort323.gif)
I spare no class or cult or creed,
My course is endless through the year.
I bow all heads and break all hearts,
All owe homage-I am Fear.
-------------General Patton
[This message has been edited by Ripsnort (edited 08-02-2000).]
-
O Club. I'm having fun with rants over here. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Yha.. it's a problem; England and here now too. I'm of the opinion that what keeps our government in line is the fact that our citizens represent it's biggest threat. Politicians run the risk of a gunsights crosshairs on his forehead if he threatens our civil liberties.
Unfortunatly; a whole buncha crazies are toolin around out there with the same weapons. I currently don't own a weapon; but should the treehuggers get a grip on our right to bear arms, I sure as hell will. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Hang
[This message has been edited by Hangtime (edited 08-02-2000).]
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort:
> > > Police later bragged that they'd taken nearly
> > > 200,000 handguns from private
> > > citizens.
> > >
> > > How did the authorities know who had handguns?
> > >
> > > The guns had been registered and licensed. Kinda
> > > like cars.
Can America be far behind?
The day citizens of this country are not allowed to "bear arms" is the day we go from being "citizens" to "sitting ducks"
my $.02
Hamish
-
What What What ????
mr. Rip and mr. Hang looking in other's house?? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/eek.gif)
Was'nt you saying: "you europeans dont understand us, we are different, look in your house and leave us alone" ??? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/rolleyes.gif)
I wish to know if you really believe you can make a revolution, you are quite different from your ancestors (liberty bell, where are you?). (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
Killing other people is not freedom. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
-
Originally posted by Naso:
Killing other people is not freedom. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
No, its not, but its a ways to the means of freedom.
-
Being killed by a criminal is not freedom either.
-
MOrale of the story...
never NEVER trust a lawyer.
unless he has a good $ reward if he gets you out of prison, dont trust them.
BTW its a sad story,but its not the first time I hear something like that...
Justice many times dont work as intended...
In fact, Justice sometimes REALLY SUCKS!
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/frown.gif)
[This message has been edited by RAM (edited 08-02-2000).]
-
Lately Chesty Hesty has been pointing out that it is the Second Amendment that guarantees the First.
I'm sure someone said it before him, though.
I'd go further and say that it guarantees all the amendments and the Constitution as well.
Killing other people is indeed not Freedom.
Maintaining the capability to STOP PEOPLE FROM KILLING YOU is, IMHO, a very basic part of freedom.
I wonder how many victims of state-sponsored terror and genocide down through the history of the world were wishing they were holding something a little more potent than a forlorn hope that "this must be a mistake" when the bell tolled for them.
Some things, to me, are in fact worth fighting for....and against.
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
-
Well, gents.
All I can say: nice to live in a country where the likelihood of being killed by a burglar or shot by an unknown is as large as being hit in the head by a pink meteor (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif).
Glad I don't need guns to defend myself here (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif).
Heheheee
American opportunists need guns though; never know then the opportunity to use it arises.
------------------
StSanta
JG54 "Grünherz"
-
Daff, (whos from UK and probably more familiar with this case) said one (maybe both?) assailants were shot in the back. Okay, manslaughter in my court...however, what the hell were those two doing in the mans house with a crowbar at 2am? I'm certain they meant no harm to the occupant... (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif).
Equilizer: Old man with shotgun equals 2 young men with crowbar.
[This message has been edited by Ripsnort (edited 08-02-2000).]
-
Better to be judged by twelve than carried by six.
And at what point did a Euro Trash talking child become an expert on American politics and social dynamics? Sounds like a bored opportunist looking for easy shots at complicated issues.
-
Well in Canada we have to deal with somethng called Bill 11.
This means that ALL firearms must be registered in Canada. As it is now owning a handgun in Canada is a pain in the prettythang!! I am not a gun owner and I am not a hunter, but i agree with their main argument.
"How many crimes are going to be committed with longarms?"
"How many criminals are going to register their illegal firearms?"
"Why should I register my antique that never leaves the gunrack?"
There are a ton of arguments on both sides.....but registering a firearm does nothing to limit the lethality of the weapon!!
If you want to make a difference on the crimereate........put the bastard away and throw away the key!! And if you are sentenced to 10 years ---- you serve 10 years!!
How many times do you read about a case where its the 3rd, 4th or 5th offense?? If the sentence fits the crime a criminal won't live long enough to commit 5 offenses!
Sorry about the rant (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
------------------
.................
Skernsk
Fat Drunk Bastards
-
He shoulda used a katana.
-
Heh Skernks, my father, being an x-president of the Canadian Police association and 30 year vet hates bill 11. The only firearm he has is his service issue, but I'm a collector and competer, so I've got a bit more radical view than him, but he agree on those main issues you pointed out.
Here's the squeak of it. Many older people/farmers will not want to register their firearms, for many ornary reasons. Say their home is buglarized, and all the weapons stolen. In the past, first thing they would report to the police as being stolen was probably their guns. Now, since their guns won't be "legal", they won't report them stolen, and VOILA! Even more illegal guns hit the street. THANKS Alan Rock you diddlying moron! Good work.
Most of my firearms are already restricted since they are pistols/assualt style rifles, and I only have to register my .22 rifles I think. But get this- they had a computer crash when transfering restricted weapons info into this "new" system and lost a lot of data, and the hard copy green cards have been "misplaced". That is why when you apply for the new FAL license they want you to "re register" your current pistols/assualites. Cute huh? I called up the 1-800 # and said I'd lost my green cards and didnt know my barrel lengths for the new forms...they couldn't even tell me what I currently had registered in the system. What a wasted of their and MY money.
The only way we're going to prevent gun crimes in Canada is too stiffen penalties, not add new laws to the already law-abiding. I understand many gun critics are well intentioned, but take it from me - I've run and owned my share of illegal firearms in my misplaced youth - it's easy as hell to get anything you want off the street where I live...If they can fix THAT, crime will drop.
[This message has been edited by BagPiper (edited 08-02-2000).]
-
The moment we lose our rights to bear arms we cease being citizens. We become subjects.
Licensing sidearms WILL NOT preclude a criminal from possession of a firearm. No carrer criminal owns a LICENSED weapon. By law; they can't.. yet they still have 'em.
I live on an Island.. with about 2 million other citizens. There are 5 bridges; all within 25 miles of each other; all through NYC.
There is 3 days worth of food on this island. 3 days is all that seperates all 2 million of us from civilization to anarchy. Needless to say; I own a boat and live less than a mile from it. I also fly; and know where to get a plane in a heluva hurry.
Should a disaster strike; I know what I have to do; what it'll take, what to take to get clear of here. I shudder to think of what will become of those who remain behind; and know that those that have weapons will have a better chance of survival than those that don't.
Real power eminates from the point of a gun. Everything else is innuendo.
Hang
-
Guy's,
Big time diagreement from an American Veteren of the Armed Forces. I am familier with guns and with people. The fact is I don't want anyone except law enforcment and the military to have the power(It is a power not a right) to posses a firearm. The way the law in this country is today any citizen sane, insane or otherwise can take the life of another person or persons at anytime they want if that person is willing to sacrafice there life to do it. This is not a fair trade.
This is also not the right of a private citizen. The 2nd amendment neither says anything about the right of a private citizen to bear arms nor is it a gaurantee of being a permanent plan of the founders of this country. It is by definition an "amendment", which means that it is a change to the Constitution and therefore can itself be changed.
Most people in this country have a vision much like the one Ripsnort discribes in this post. At night, your home and hear a noise and you get your trusty shotgun and blast the bad guys. Well I grew up in a big City(Philadelphia) and I can tell you that nothing can be further from the truth 99 out of a 100 times. The criminals are proffesional criminals and you are an amature security gaurd. They come to your home during the day when you are at work. They steal your gun and possible Shoot you or your family when you do come home. If you are lucky they just steal your gun and kill someone else later. Which starts the real problem. Everyone wants the right to have a gun but nobody wants the responability of ownership. If you drive a car you need insurance and a license. You buy a house you need insurance and you have to maintain the safety of your property, if you own a dog that bites someone you are responsable etc. etc. But someone steals your gun and commits a crime and the owner thinks that somehow they have no responsability. If you want the power of G-d in your hand you bear the wrath if the worst happens. People say guns aren't the problem in this country, they are right. The gun owners are the problem.
Solution, short of banning the private sale of guns all together which is no sweat of my back I propose the same solution used by the US Armed forces. If you live on base and you own a firearm the weapon stays in the armory when you are not using it. Since the intent of the second amendment is to make sure that the guns are in the hands of militia's then every town/city should have an elected miltia officer who runs the local armory where all the guns are held, balistically finger printed and the owner licensed and registered. When you need it you come get it, when your done you put it back. That would much better define the 2nd amendment than the anarchy which is taking place in this country now.
More people by far every year in this country die by their own guns than ever even have the chance to save themselves with them. There are over 400 guns related deaths in the City I am from every year. Many women and children that never had a clue what was about to happen before it was to late. This is not sane, logical or Constitutional. Children or adults should not have to pack a guns to feel safe, no matter what the Multi-billion dollar gun companies have to say about it.
If you want to be able to defend yourself learn Boxing. If you want to protect your house buy a dog. If you want to kill someone buy a gun, that's all they were ever meant to do.
Thanks
F4UDOA
-
Lets check some statistics..
1997; 32,436 Total Gun Deaths, all types. Intentional (law enforcement) Accidental; and self inflicted (suicide)
1997, 41,967 Traffic Fatalities.
1997; 98,397 People died from Medical Malpractice.
1997, 321,467 Lung Cancer Fatalities.
Outlaw automobiles, Quacks and ban the sale of cigarettes first.
Keep the priorities straight.
Hang
-
Thought better of this one and canned it..heh
[This message has been edited by BagPiper (edited 08-02-2000).]
-
Originally posted by Hangtime:
Lets check some statistics..
1997; 32,436 Total Gun Deaths, all types. Intentional (law enforcement) Accidental; and self inflicted (suicide)
1997, 41,967 Traffic Fatalities.
1997; 98,397 People died from Medical Malpractice.
1997, 321,467 Lung Cancer Fatalities.
Outlaw automobiles, Quacks and ban the sale of cigarettes first.
Keep the priorities straight.
Hang
But all the Gun owning smokers, car owners and quacks would start a revolution if you tried to ban any of those things.
Its there constitutional right it seems.
-
Originally posted by F4UDOA:
Guy's,
The fact is I don't want anyone except law enforcment and the military to have the power(It is a power not a right) to posses a firearm.
Um nope it's a right not a power. Power in this country is supposed to flow from the individual up to the government. That's the beauty of our consitution. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
This is also not the right of a private citizen. The 2nd amendment neither says anything about the right of a private citizen to bear arms nor is it a gaurantee of being a permanent plan of the founders of this country. It is by definition an "amendment", which means that it is a change to the Constitution and therefore can itself be changed.
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/eek.gif) (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/eek.gif) (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/eek.gif) (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/eek.gif) (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/eek.gif) (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/eek.gif) (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/eek.gif) (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/eek.gif)
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed."
That seems pretty plane to me. That right is infringed daily in America too (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/frown.gif) I doubt it will be changed anytime soon. Not with out another civil war anyway. Guns suck, but guns can be used for good too. It would be nice to live in a society without any guns, but that isn't the world we live in.
Udie
-
F4U, i think you are right, is the people owning the gun, the real danger, especially those thinking it's their right to use it.
A man with a gun have more power than one without it.
Someone like Rip or Udie or Hang, believing they are right, can violate my freedom using their guns, and the better think a society can do is to render them inoffensive by subtracting them the guns.
If you have a gun, soon or later you will use it, and maybe for wrong reason.
Solution is not to recreate the FarWest, where the faster to use a gun is the one "having more rights".
Originally posted by Udie:
(CUT)
Guns suck, but guns can be used for good too. It would be nice to live in a society without any guns, but that isn't the world we live in.
Guns are used to kill, nothing more nothing less... oh yes, and to play shooting targets.
I dont see any other use... uh, maybe for sex... naaa (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
Ehi!!
Maybe there is some connection between the gun and the noodle.
LOL
"My gun is bigger than yours!!"
ROTFL (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
-
Hmmmm, let's see. Hitler gave every German a handgun when he took power in 1933,right??
Stalan gave every Russian a handgun when he took power too,right? Everyone where "the trains ran on time" was given a handgun,right?
Now, why the heck would you want more gun laws in the USA???
-
Check out http://www.free-tonymartin.org.uk/ (http://www.free-tonymartin.org.uk/)
-
well well well... I've wondered if and when this debate would ever come up in here. Seems like where ever I hang out on the net it comes up sooner or later. And it's always clearly defined lines.
1) Law-abiding gun owners who have no intention of using thier guns for "evil" purposes and who have taken the time to learn proper firearm handling and educate thier families and friends to try and shatter some media created myths. We are a dying breed, and <Salute> all of us.
2) Members of the anti-gun establishment who believe guns are evil things that should be demolished as quickly as possible. These are the people that scream for government regulation because they are too scared or lazy to take personal responsibility for thier actions. They prefer to have Uncle Sam make everything they see as bad go away to make them safer (can we say San Angeles from Demolition Man?). Also included in this group are those who have had friends/loved one killed by a gun in the hands of a criminal, or a friend or loved one commited suicide with a firearm (was that the gun's fault?)
3) The "unwashed masses" who understand neither side of the arguement but are so terrorized by the moaning and screaming of the anti-gunners that they simply can not see past the balony that the anti-gunners spew. They are swayed by the sensationalism of the media reports incidents such as columbine or the shooting in the Perimeter Mall food court in Atlanta many year ago (who remembers that one? I was there).
4) The criminals who sit back and laugh thier arses off while group 2 terrorizes group 3 into seeing this from the anti-gunner point of view. The criminals dinnae care, they have thier guns (and you anti-gunners can't get them either, how's that make ya feel?) and they'd love to see nation-wide gun confiscation. It would mean that much more easy meat on the streets. Several years back a noted editor for one of the larger gun magazines interviewed some juvenille gangmembers who were in juvy hall. One question asked was "who do you pick as your targets?" and the gangmember answered "tourists". The next question, obviously, was "Why pick tourists?" and the gangmembers answer: "Because we know they aren't carrying a gun".
I remember back when Florida was considering passing its concealed carry laws. All the anti-gunners came crawling from thier cesspools screaming about vigilantes in the streets and how crime rates would sky rocket. Florida went ahead and passed the concealed carry law despite the crying of the vocal minority. And do you know what happened? Nope, crime rates dinnae sky rocket like the doom-sayers had predicted. They DROPPED.
Another 'for the record' for ya. Kinnesaw, Georgia. Fairly quiet small town not too far from Atlanta. Not alot of breakins in this town. There's an ordinence that requires every household to have a handgun on the premises (complete with guidelines for storage and educating the kids about the dangers of guns etc). Granted it's been goin on 7yr since a friend who lived there told me all about it, but I dinnae think it's changed. I'd be awfully surprised if it had.
Now, honestly, which group from above do you fall into?
I'm in group 1 and I'll proudly stand by all others in this group.
Hang pointed it out pretty succinctly:
A man with a gun is a citizen; a man without a gun is a subject.
Someone once invited me to what they called a "gun rally" around the time the "assualt weapons" ban was being considered. Not knowing this person all that well I thought it might have been an organized protest against the weapon ban. Boy was I in for a surprise. Here are these people (probably 60 or so total) gathered in a guy's yard on Lake Lanier with a BBQ setup and talking about how guns should be banned, confiscated and destroyed. Real quick I'm a stranger in a strange land, especially since I carrying my 1911A1 in condition 1 (yes, I'm licensed to carry in GA). They're letting everyone take a turn to relate thier thoughts (all basically the same things said in different order, parroting the media). The guy that invited me volunteered me to say something. Now these people had been talking about how guns kill people and obviously forgotten the human factor in the equation, so being the guy I am I wandered to the makeshift podium and stood there for a minute to let it get quite. Then I said "Gun bans are an evil thing" and reached under my jacket and pulled out the .45 and laid it on the table in front of God and everyone (couldna help but chuckle at the startled gasps etc). Then with my hands behind my back I commanded my gun to start killing people. It laid on the table and a couple of people actually dove for the deck. I yelled at the gun to kill people, but it just sat there. Then I reminded them of how it takes a person to pick the gun up, aim it, and squeeze the trigger in order for someone to die from a gunshot. Someone actually suggested that the gun wasn't loaded. I picked it up, aimed at a point on the ground about 4-5ft away, snicked off the safety and fired a round. Saftey on, laid the gun back on the table.
Guns do not kill people. PEOPLE KILL PEOPLE. The gun is merely a tool, just like a hammer or a screwdriver or a saw. In the right hands a gun feeds people (some of us do actually still hunt for food ya know. Venison is mighty tasty) or protects the innocent. In the wrong hands guns are used to kill people.
In the hands of carpenter a hammer builds a house, shelter from the storm. In the hands of a homicidal maniac that same hammer bashes heads in. Here's an idea, let's ban hammers too (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
On the power/right thing, the 2nd ammendment is a part of the Bill of Rights (first 10 ammendments). It is most deffinately a right for the people to keep and bear arms.
Now it's been a good while since I've read the constitution of the US, but dinnae it somewhere include a provision for overthrow (armed if necessary) of the government, by the people, if the government becomes to tyrannical. I seem to recall something about that being a duty of the people in policing of the government.
The statistics Hang posted speak for themsevles. If you take out law enforcement, self defense, and suicide shootings, there are a number of other things that have higher death tolls than firearms (except for your criminals out there (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif) ).
Hang, if it ever gets that bad, stop at GON first. We can load up the arsenal and make sure we're well defended (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
Now I'm gonna go take a nap. Used up all my morning posting time (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
=====================
Here's a debate on gun control from a UBB setup for a site dedicated to the playstation game GranTurismo and GranTurismo2
http://ubb.granturismo.com/Forum20/HTML/001421.html (http://ubb.granturismo.com/Forum20/HTML/001421.html)
[This message has been edited by CavemanJ (edited 08-03-2000).]
-
Ahhh,
Comparing cigarettes, doctors and cars to guns huh. Well here is the difference between them all.
Cigarettes is a form of suicide for people who are to stupid to read the label. Stupid people should have the right to kill themselves if they want to. No problem at all.
Cars, the closest to a gun,in that they cause allot of needless deaths. However a large number of stupid people kill themselves every year with cars. Probably half the people that die in car accidents every year get killed in there own cars. They also cause a false sense of power much like guns. Also much like guns the car manufactures did not want to make there cars safer until congress forced them to in the 1970's with seatbelt that work and Airbags. Cars are much safer now than they were 20years ago thanks to those laws. Unlike cars however GUN OWNERS fight every effort to make their guns safer. Why?? A smoking gun owner driving a car is possible the stupidest person on the earth today. But at least if you own a car you are forced to register the car every year, purchase insurance for the car as well be a licensed driver. There are no such precautions for guns.
Medical Doctors, again at least they have to go to school 8years, do a 4 year residency and then pay a mint for insurance in case something happens. And of course if you go to these doctors, you are going of your own free will. They are not kidnapping you off of the street and making you get your sinuses scrapped or your noodle augmented(gun owning smoker)or anything else for that matter. There is no such thing as a drive by appendectamy.
Gun owners, the route of the problem. You have to ask yourself why you want to own a gun in the first place. Do you honestly think you will fight off an intruder in a blazing gun battle? Or do you just enjoy fire arms. I was on the fence of buying a gun for a long time before I realized that it was entirely impractical and that I had a better chance of shooting my wife than any criminal.
Absolute power corrupts absolutly. And a gun is just that. You can't have that kind of power without earning it. You can't have it without having the responsablity. In todays America you have neither. A car owner has 100 times more responsabilty for their car as any gun owner does for for their gun. A Doctor has to commit 12years of his/her life before they can practice medicine. A gun owner can walk into a sporting goods store or gun show and walk out with the power of life or death in his hands the same day. I don't know how much more clear that statement can be. The problem is that you need to earn it first. Our founding fathers did. Did you??
Later
F4UDOA
-
Caveman,
Interesting post.
First thing about guns. They are NOT EVIL.
Gun owners are not prepared to be responsable for the power of life and death.
You are working with a misconception from the start. Not everybody who kills with a gun kills for a reason or has been a criminal up until that point. Some people just kill because they don't like someones religon or skin color. There was a woman who was a mother killed in Willow Grove Pa. this past year by a man who shot her because he wanted to see if he could. No reason. Was this woman somehow at fault for being killed? Should her family be comforted by the fact that this gentleman who had no prior criminal record was excersizing his second amendment rights? It happens every day in this country. Far more people dye than will ever be saved. Most of all not saved by gun owners but saved from gun owners.
Pick one person in your family that you would be willing to sacrafice to a random gun death before you choose to pick up the mantle of gun ownership. Would you give a child? Mother? Father? Son? I would give none of these to say I had the right to carry a gun.
F4UDOA
-
Better to be judged by twelve than carried by six.
More than six will carry me in triumph as I take ovr the world. Or less; four riders with interesting names, such as death, famine...oh, you know them. You are American, after all.
And at what point did a Euro Trash talking child become an expert on American politics and social dynamics? Sounds like a bored opportunist looking for easy shots at complicated issues.
For what it is worth I'm as much an expert as you are. As far as these issues being complicated, they might, they might not. But if we were to speak on things seriously, this sure as hell isn't the forum for it. Rip makes an emotional post for gun ownership, I take a crack shot at it for the fun of it. I guess I should have posted an emotional thread describing the hell a mother goes through after losing her only son to a gun toting gun owning fascist American opportunist who is only "defending his way of life". That way we would have two emotional arguments and could throw logic out the door and go on arguing, bringing up ever more anecdotes (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif).
And it *is* true; am happy I don't need a shrecking gun to feel or be safe. In my 25 five years of life, I haven't been a victim of serious crime. A few stolen biycles, some fights I couldnt avoid (you try growing up as a newbie outside foreigner in northern Sweden (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)) and some, uhm, brushes with the law for driving without a license as a youngster (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif).
So, can a country be safe without guns? Yes. Can the US citizen be safe without one? Currently, I doubt it. First thing I would do when or if I move to the US would get a gun, and train extensively with it. Whole different culture.
I guess my take on the gun control issue in the USA is; your country, you do what you can, feel or must do to be safe. But, regardless it seems to me that gun ownership is trying to cure the disease by treating the symptoms.
Come to think of it, I would like a handgun. They're tons of fun to shoot with. But I am not sure having guns free here would make Denmark a safer place, just as I am not sure having strict gun control in the US will make the US a safer place; on the latter I highly suspect the reverse is true due to the large amount of guns already out there on the market.
Who knows. Our society is getting more violent Maybe in the future, I will be safer with a gun than without one in this country as well.
But, I would need it to defend my country against American opportunist world police, not criminals (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif). Terrorist Americans. BAH, humbug.
------------------
StSanta
JG54 "Grünherz"
-
"Guns kill people"
"People kill people"
People with guns kill people
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
Or, at least, have an easier time doing so (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif).
------------------
StSanta
JG54 "Grünherz"
-
Ok i must interfere here too,
i dont think anyone or any Law can stop People kill People with
Guns or without. To have Guns or not to have will not solve the Problem we have these days in our Society.
The Problem starts much deeper at the roots of the Society.
No one is born as a killer. Our Society produces such criminals and
exactly there must something change.
If we talk over whether weapons should be permitted or not, its like
giving some Ill medicines so he dont feel the hurt, instead to look up
the cause ! Preventing is the word, before something breaks out.
This is one of the Big challanges for our countrys and the culture.
The Future will show us the end result, trust me.
And yes i'm very sad to hear about Tony Martin and what happen
in our so bright Civilization.
Gh0stFT
-
Ghosth,
Exactly! You have to change peoples hearts. Just last month a father at a hockey game murdered another father with his bare hands. No gun, knife or stick. You could murder somebody with a spoon or a toothpick, should they be banned?
BTW, if you've ever been target shooting you'll know what a good time it can be. Dove hunting is an absolute BLAST. Having a dove flying at 55+ mph pulling the correct lead and having it drop right at your feet (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) I'd imagine that skeet shooting is as much fun as dove hunting, though I've never done it.
Udie
-
Yep, another dang gun-owning opportunist here!
There have been guns in my family since at least before WW2.
Handguns, rifles, shotguns; the usual, common sporting stuff. Every single family member has attended a minimum of one safety course.
My boys learned to handle guns around age 7, had their hunter safety card by age 8. Never have had an accident of any type at home or in the field; they always KNEW what a gun could do and what a gun was used for. More importantly, they knew what a gun WAS NOT used for.
Primarily we hunt with our guns. Small game, large game, waterfowl...and if we kill it, we eat it. Period, no exceptions.
We also target shoot. Clay targets, paper targets, all at a licensed family range. It's fun..way better than a Hollywood or Danish movie.
So, my family, which has NEVER used a gun illegally, used a gun against a person, used a gun for anything except sport should be in favor of giving them up? Should be required to give them up?
Nope.
The car analogy? License, registration, insurance? Yes, cars have all those things. Traffic fatalities are STILL higher than firearms fatalities.
So License/Registration/Insurance doesn't stop autos from killing does it? Isn't that the real concern, the deaths and not the reimbursement of the correct individuals for someone's untimely demise? <American Trial Lawyers now target me, I guess (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif) >
We have pretty strict drunk driving laws...so how come I keep reading about guys that have had their license revoked 3 times being arrested yet again for DUI? There's a clue for you.
I think it can easily be shown that a LARGE number of crimes, including those in which a gun was involved, are committed by individuals that have previous criminal records. Somehow, however, these PROVEN CRIMINALS find their way back out into society...and guess what trade they resume?
A very small percentage of people is causing 90% of the problem. Solution: punish EVERYONE! Great..now I'm back in the Air Force! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
Sheesh! What am I thinking? People aren't BAD! These guys don't WANT to be criminals! Society MADE them do it!
Yeah, sorry...it is the guns fault....and any law-abiding gun owner should be PUNISHED for even liking guns!
OH NO! HELLLLLLP! I'M AGREEING WITH CAVE!!!!
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
I would like to go wild boar hunting this Sunday F4U, could you drive over the the armory, and pick up my hunting bow for me? You know, the one that is silent, leaves a 1” diameter hole in the flesh of anything the razor broad head blows through? If a guy had a mindset to kill, it would sure beat the hell outta a crack punk gangbanger shooting his 9mm really cool sideways, so I guess they outta be banned too.
A gallon of gas and a empty wine bottle in the wrong hands could potentially ruin someone’s day. A truckload of toejam and kerosene could ruin 300 peoples day.
I really miss the point of me supposing to feel bad for owning guns. I use them to hunt, and put occational meals on the table. I don’t expect to have robbers in my neighborhood, but if they do, they aint going to running into a mut, and I’m not going to say “Gee fellas, lets have some honor, and fight fair. Boxing only, no kicking or scratching, please.”
I’ll just shoot them..... Twice.
-
Well Gents,
It's like this, you can kill someone with can opener if you want to right, so why not outlaw can openers? The obvious answer is that can openers were not meant to kill and guns are meant for. Too obvious though. Here is the more base reason. If you want to kill someone you have to get dirty. With a knife, bat or otherwise you have to get close and get messy. Most people, as much as we all like to talk toejam don't have the stomach for that type of behaivor. What a gun really does is make killing impersonal. It makes it easy and you don't have to even see the other persons face. It makes it a cold cowardly act. It also gives people the abilty to make mistakes that they just can't come back from. Once you pull a gun out you've got to do something because you have crossed the worlds largest line in the sand. I'm not talking about shooting ducks either. I mean people just like yourselves that react to a situtation like they think John Wayne would and they either get killed or kill someone that they would not otherwise have done.
Toad I hear were your coming from because we all want to be the masters of our own destiny. I grew up around guns too and I have fired many since I have been an adult. It's fun stuff. But how many accidents do you have to have before you live the rest of your life with a regret instead of a child. It's just not worth it to me. You say don't put my beliefs on you right? Well that means that my families safety is now at the mercy of my neighbor and his family who may be a drunk with a family of A-holes. So I have to live my life afraid that him or his kid is going to blow me or my family away for no reason? I can defend myself and my family but I can do nothing to prevent a gun from killing and that is wrong. My right to live is greater than your right to carry.
Look at that story that Rip posted in the beggining of this thread. If that old man had bought a German Shepard instead of a Gun he wouldn't be in jail and he wouldn't have been robbed or hurt. On the otherside if those crooks had guns he would be dead too. It is a loose, loose the second you add a gun into the mix.
On the subject of Auto deaths. If gun owners are ok with registering their vehicals how come registering their guns is such a problem? If there was a proper ballistics record kept then gun crimes would be solved in minutes just as vehicals can be identified in minutes. The NRA doesn't even want one day waiting to perform a backround check? That is insane and unreasonable. The NRA won't even come out with a stance on what weapons shouldn't be allowed in public hands. There are people in this country that privately own 50Cal sniper rifles. Have duck and dear gotten that large and dangerous??
How about cop killer bullets? Why did Dick Chaney vote against restricting them? How about Biological weapons, stinger missles or nuclear devices? When is enough enough?
F4UDOA
-
When you can answer the following question, things like guns and gun control will cease to exist.
"Is your glass half empty or half full?"
-
F4,
Like it or not, your family is at the mercy of a nation full of neighbors who may impersonally do you or yours in with tools ranging from a Ford Excursion to a crowbar.
What you choose to ignore is that CRIMINALS are responsible for these acts, not law-abiding citizens. Responsibility most certainly does NOT rest with the inanimate objects used by those criminals in the commission of a crime.
If you get swacked by a drunk in a Toyota, he was breaking the law by DUI. Odds are very high he is a repeat offender.
If you get nailed through the forehead with a golf club in a burglary, the odds are the guy will be a repeat offender of some sort.
If you get shot in a drive-by "gangsta" shootout, odds are incredibly high that the trigger man has already been in trouble with the law.
So the guns are the problem? Sorry, the way we deal with CRIMINALS is the problem.
Check with Santa here and see what they do with DUI drivers in the Scandanavian countries. I went to pilot training with four great Norwegians..they really opened my eyes.
As for registration and your other panaceas, I have two personal beliefs which you won't accept <and I probably won't change (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif) > either:
1. Nothing will change until we seriously deal with the criminals first.
2. All of the rhetoric from your side of the church makes it ABUNDANTLY CLEAR that you won't be satisfied until guns are totally banned and confiscated. No matter what your side gets, it's never enough and the assault begins again immediately.
Well, I'm not inclined to make any of that easy for you. I and others like me are also entitled to our viewpoints and have the right to defend them in all public forums.
I'm an NRA member too...but you know what? I never was until your side of the aisle made it clear to me that confiscation was the ultimate, unswerving goal.
Why does that guy that owns the .50 cal sniper rifle bother you so? If he doesn't break the law, you'll never know he has it. How many .50 cal rifles HAVE been used in a crime? That should be an EASY statistic to run down. I'll wager it's about zero.
Is it the POTENTIAL for danger or murder or mayhem that bothers you?
Well, we're going to have to confiscate a lot more than guns and autos to remove THAT!
-
Hmmmmmm...
Case in point. Switzerland. Peaceful country. Has not been to war for many hundreds of years.
Each and every male citizen of appropriate age and physical health has a miltary weapon in his closet. And he's trained quite extensively on how to use it.
I wonder.. why are there so few gun deaths in Switzerland.. and why have they been at peace for so many years??
I'm probably talkin out my bellybutton here.. but seems to me; it's our society thats sick. And takin my gun away ain't gonna make it well. Not by a long shot. (pun intended)
The following is from a guy that normally makes me nuts.. but here he strikes a chord that has a ring of truth in it.. some small kernel of understanding; so I'll share it with you here.
For the life of me, I can't understand what could have gone wrong in Littleton, Colorado. If only the parents had kept their children away from the guns, we wouldn't have had such a tragedy. Yeah, it must have been the guns.
It couldn't have been because half of our children are being raised in broken homes.
It couldn't have been because our children get to spend an average of 30 seconds in meaningful conversation with their parents each day. After all we give our children quality time.
It couldn't have been because we treat our children as pets and our pets as children.
It couldn't have been because we place our children in day care centers where they learn their socialization skills among their peers under the law of the jungle while employees who have no vested interest in the children look on and make sure that no blood is spilled.
It couldn't have been because we allow our children to watch, on average, seven hours of television a day filled with the glorification of sex and violence that isn't fit for adult consumption.
It couldn't have been because we allow (or even encourage) our children to enter into virtual worlds in which, to win the game, one must kill as many opponents as possible in the most sadistic way possible.
It couldn't have been because we have sterilized and contracepted our families down to sizes so small that the children we do have are so spoiled with material things that they come to equate the receiving of the material with love.
It couldn't have been because our children, who historically have been seen as a blessing from God, are now being viewed as either a mistake created when contraception fails or inconveniences that parents try to raise in their spare time.
It couldn't have been because we give two year prison sentences to teenagers who kill their newborns.
It couldn't have been because our school systems teach the children that they are nothing but glorified apes who have evolutionized out of some primordial soup of mud.
It couldn't have been because we teach our children that there are no laws of morality that transcend us, that everything is relative and that actions don't have consequences. What the heck, the president gets away with it.
Nah, it must have been the guns.
Paul Harvey
If this ultra-right wing conservative twit with ears can see society is sick.. and that it ain't guns; then maybe there's a problem. Yah think?? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Hang
[This message has been edited by Hangtime (edited 08-03-2000).]
-
Toad,
Why do you feel that you have somehow earned the right to possess a weapon capable of killing so many people with so little thought? Do you think the goverment is trying to get you? Do you think some minority is going to come and take what some valuble possesion of yours? What war exactly are you fighting? Do you feel threatened when asked to register your car? Why not register a gun, why the pushback from the NRA about simply registering weapons at gun shows? How about doing background checks to weed out criminals and the criminally insane? Why is owning cop killer bullets important in anyones life?
The answer, you have been convinced that you are fighting a war against an invisible enemy. Where or what this enemy is I do not know. Maybe your afraid of democrats or minorities. Trying to get gun owners to open their eyes to the world is like the largest hostage negotiation in history. You've locked yourself inside a house of cards hiding from the boogie man and you won't come out without a fight. For you I am in some evil church pursecuting you. But everytime you turn on the news more people are dead because either some honest gun owner went berserk or some guy with a stolen or illegal gun decided to shoot up the neighborhood. So tell me Toad, who's winning your war?
Also the concept of criminals commiting these acts is a complete fraud. For every criminal with a gun there are many numbers of law abiding citizens who assist. #1 The manufacture who sells it to an irresponsable dealer #2 the Dealer who sells the gun without proper documentation #3 The lazy owner who puts the gun under his bed only to have a criminal who is smarter than the gun owner come and steal the gun when he is not home (then the gun owner washes his hands of the gun and seals his fate). And finally the #4 criminal who kills an innocent with the gun. Who is guilty? Every single person in the loop is guilty of undermining the laws that exist today to control gun violence. The laws in this country will never work as long as people treat guns like baseball cards. Thats why you need to get a grip on reality. Other peoples survival is more important than your part time hobby. If I put a gun to your head and said "give me your gun or else" you would hand over your guns. So if your survival is more important than your gun, why isn't someone elses survival more important than your gun?
Toad, you live in Kansas and other than the "Wizard of Oz" I don't know much about Kansas. I grew up in Philadelphia and I now live in NJ in the most dense population base in America. In your idealogical society everyone would be armed. With that logic if one shot were fired it would set off the worlds largest chain reaction and gun battle in history. What bizarre logic can this satisfy? Will that help you win the war against your boogie man? Is that life, liberty and the freedom to pursue happyness?
F4UDOA
-
Hangtime:
Check out the regulations and restrictions in Switzerland and how they must handle their guns. It sure ain't as in the US (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif).
Just saying it because the differences between laws and culture are too big for them to be comparative (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif).
------------------
StSanta
JG54 "Grünherz"
-
Actually,I do have the right to possess a gun. Even a Class III fully automatic rifle requiring a special license, if I choose to buy one.
I have that right through the 2nd Amendment. It's the same way I have the right to free speech and the freedom from unlawful search and seizure. The EXACT same way.
You folks don't like to hear that but there it is. It will eventually come to the Supreme Court and it will be so clear that even the "antis" can figure it out. Or, we'll lose. But you and I won't settle it here. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Once again, your most recent diatribe is a fine example of why no one I know wants to register. Because obviously that won't be enough for you. Would that do it F4? If we register will you agree to our right to keep and bear and leave us alone?
State it right here. Is that enough for you?
I'm betting you'll say no...because the entire rest of your post centers on you opinion that guns have no place in society. So after you get registration, it will be confiscation, right?
Anyway, let me see if I have this criminal chain thing down...
The manufacturer that sells a car to a irresponsible dealer who sells the car to a guy with 2 DUI's already on his record and whiskey on his breath. The lazy car owner that doesn't lock his car, which is stolen and crashed by drunken, partying teenagers (then the car owner washes his hands of the car and seals his fate). The liquor company that stocked a store where the irresponsible dealer didn't check ID's on the kids. The tavern owner that pours one last shot for a "regular customer" even though the guy's already tipsy. And finally the DUI Driver who kills an entire family in a minivan but walks away from the crash. Who is guilty? Every single person in the loop is guilty of undermining the laws that exist today to control DUI driving.
...and cars are killing more people than guns.
Did I get them all F4? We work this right, we can arrest the whole country! Don't forget the guys in the auto shop that keep those cars running, either.
Kansas is not New Jersey, thank god. I lived in Jersey; the East seems to have more gun laws than it can keep track of. We have almost none. We don't have much trouble out here with guns but apparently you folks do. What am I to make of that? More laws, more trouble?
I'm not breaking any laws, State or National. Yet you see me as the "bad guy". I think you should focus on those who do break the laws...and not let them back out in 6 weeks or 6 months.
I think perhaps the basic underlying conflict is that I believe what Jefferson said: "That government governs best which governs least."
-
Santa.. Truly; as I mentioned above I'm clueless as to the Swiss regulations... but I know they have em... and that's a very safe place to live. Possibly safer than canned-ham land. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
FU4DOA.. tell yah what.. you get the goverment to disarm and I'll THINK about handing my rights to bear arms back. Till then; I want the means to resist; to survive and/or defend my own property in a worse case scenario.
It's quite possible that a big reason we are NOT a military dictatorship right now is those very same rights. (remember "I'm in charge!" Al Haig?)
The only thing that truly seperates a mob from a batch or marauding barbarians is the clothing style. If there is a social breakdown (and if you've never seen a riot first hand you are clueless) on a local or (heaven forbid) a larger scale yer gonna wish you had something more substantial than a golf club to protect your family.
You don't wanna gun? Great. Don't get one. You don't wanna feel threatened by yer neighbor who has a gun?? Great. Be a policeman; join the force. You'll get a heluva education on 'gun control'. Don't want yer kids in danger?? You better be damn careful about who you let 'em hang out with. Better yet; do as Toad did. Educate them..
I hear Wyoming is nice. Damn far between neighborhoods.
Or; you could move to Denmark and settle in next to StSanta. He'll cover yer six. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Hang
-
Well, let me tell you guys my personal experience on this matter:
I come from Colombia, albeit one of the most violent countries in the world. We don't have gun control laws (ok, we do have some, but there is no enforcment on them) and you can easily have anything from a slingshot to a machine gun on your house if you can get your hands on it. Personally, my family only owned a 22 caliber pistol which was prone to jam in the second shot (wee), and that was because "its better to have SOMETHING just in case", but we never were raised to think that guns solved anything. I have a cousin who is a total gun freak. He'd be the head of the NRA here if he could. He owned and fired AND engaged other people (aka guerillas, thiefs, street shootouts) with pistols, assault rifles (Galil) and shotguns.
What am I getting to here? Well, to get such weapons back there is really hard, as it is more dangerous to get them than to face the law because you got them. My family and my cousin's family moved to the US a few years ago (you can guess why). We couldnt bring any weapons of course (except my WW2 era rifle, I dont know what kind it is, so if there are any know-about-rifles folks here let me know ill give you as much info as I can on it..i'd love to know what it is!).
When we got to the US my cousin got himself a shotgun and a very advanced pistol... and he wasn't even a resident yet... and he got it all in less than a week! That really, really freaked me out.
Back in subject... in the US you can only "legally" shoot someone else if they are in your property, 20 feet away, FACING YOU with a weapon and other stupid rules of the sort.
In my country, if soemone is in your property, even in your front yard (everything is fenced over there) without your permission, you have ALL the right and the obligation (to the safety of your own family) to shoot the intruder to kingdom come. In most cases when that happens, the police doesnt even question you. Body in house, family safe. Most of the times they even had the kindness of taking the body away and dump it in the river and go on as if nothing had happened (too much paperwork to process and investigate the intruder). And yet here in the US, where my house now has no security devices except a lousy IR alarm (over there the windows have bars and everything.. and yeah policein US does work, but they generally arrive AFTER the intruder does its thing).. and they now tell my cousin, tell ME that I cant shoot someone who broke into my house and who I am sure is NOT the neighbor coming in at 3am to borrow a cup of sugar???? WTF? Thank god those regulations do not cover my marble-ammo, full CO2 pressure Paintball gun (that thing makes a hole through 5 cm's of plywood... HA! try that on skin! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif) ). Or the bow and arrows im planning to buy (quite an interesting sport once you try it).
Ermm.. in short, I support the right to defend your family from any threat, even a potential one. That guy in the UK shouldve been let go and be at peace (even if they were thiefs or hostile, that guy still has to live with the fact that he killed someone else).
-
Very interesting, Tac.
We don't get much of the South American viewpoint here.
Thx.
-
Ripsnort, the case you cite above had happened in Texas, it might've been perfectly legal to mount the two heads on the study wall (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Waaaaa Squad mates promoting blatant socialism, I can't belive it! Of course all these new gun control laws have brought the crime rate down but some crime stats are just part of the high price of independence and freedom. To register your long arms puts you on somebodys list.. They know exactly where you live and what weapons you own F4 why do you want me dead? (aw now 10Bears isn't that a stretch) No not really, they come out to my house to confiscate my hand guns (which have to be registered) I say "no way" and go back inside, well, the cops are armed, I'm armed.. therefore I'm dead
\Solution, short of banning the private sale of guns all together which is no sweat of \my back I propose the same solution used by the US Armed forces. If you live on \base and you own a firearm the weapon stays in the armory when you are not using \it.
F4 what is this stuff you've been reading?!!!!!! OH MY GOD!! This is the most UN-AMERICAN statement I've read in a long time.... Don't you think us adult Americans know better where to store weapons?
1776 wrote:
\Hmmmm, let's see. Hitler gave every German a handgun when he took power \in 1933,right??
Wrong 1776 dead wrong! first thing he did was confiscate all privately owned firearms Now maybe your right about nazi party members getting a luger
Tac Wrote:
\When we got to the US my cousin got himself a shotgun and a very advanced \pistol... and he wasn't even a resident yet... and he got it all in less than a week! That \really, really freaked me out.
Ahhh ain't America Grand?
\Gun owners, the route of the problem. You have to ask yourself why you want to \own a gun in the first place.
Because I can. Its an American right even says it in the Constitution and it won't be infringed even thou your trying awful hard.
\Do you honestly think you will fight off an intruder in a blazing gun battle?
Yes!
\Or do you just enjoy fire arms. I was on the fence of buying a gun for a long time \before I realized that it was entirely impractical and that I had a better chance of \shooting my wife than any criminal.
Thats you F4 that was your choice other Americans are able to choose as well... Ya know, all these nanny laws do nothing but take away more freedoms not add to them. And before you think I'm some right-wing gun loon I'm not. Just wait until religious right comes in and decides its in society best interest to confiscate all guns....You'll wish you'd have re thought this argument
-
nm (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
[This message has been edited by funked (edited 08-04-2000).]
-
F4UDOA-in response to your post and solution: Try telling that to someone that has had a gun pulled on them 3 times (fired at from point blank range once, good thing he was drunk!) and try telling that to my wife that avoided robbery and possible rape when she brandished her weapon while pretending to look for keys. And that, my friend, in the land of Lattes, thats as liberal as it gets...Seattle.
If you'd like further explanation of these stories, I will send them to you via email. Meanwhile, everytime I go out, I'm holstered.
I do agree with alot of the stricter gun control laws, but I do not agree with trigger locks or banning them altogether(or, having someone else hold my gun for me)
-
Ooh, does this mean that if I move to the US, I as a foreigner, can also get a gun?
A big one, with lots of rounds in the magazine?
One I can carry around concealed after getting a special permit?
And defend myself against marauding American opportunists? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
Seriously though, for defense against burglars or riots and so forth, I have a 12 gauge shotgun. I legally own it, and use it for skeet shooting. Am even good at it.
But, if I tried to take it with me out so I could defend myself against a mugging or a situation that develops, I'd have a hard time, since it is quite visible and cumbersome.
With a handgun, I could just hide it in my jacket.
Now, another question I have about US gun laws and their intentions; let's say you are allowed to own a gun and have it in your home, but need a special hard to get permit to carry it concealed. To me, at home I am already covered by my 12 gauge; I'd rather have a shotgun for short range gun fights (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif). The places where I'd feel worried would be outside my home. But there I am not allowed to carry a gun and defend myself, unless I am lucky enough to get permit?
Strikes me as a bit odd, going only half way. The argument o f the law abiding gun owner sure would apply and then every such person should be allowed to carry it concealed.
And, to defend myself against the state which has tanks and aircraft, I want Stinger missiles, anti tank guns and probably some biological weapons. Why can't I have it as a law abiding citizen?
Next question, just educating myself here: I understand the right to bear arms comes from the second amendment. An amendment, what is that - isn't it something that is added to the constitution, but is changeable?
Just wanna know (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif).
------------------
StSanta
JG54 "Grünherz"
-
In Washington state, you are issued a permit every 4 years. You are screened for any felonies, and any domestic dispute misdimeanors as well. From one of my police officer friends (2 of my closest friends are cops) "Its equivelent of an FBI background check, unfortunately, it doesn't cover a background check as to whether someone has had proper training in handgun operation."
That's one law I think should be incorporated here, if you own a gun, you should have proper classes on handling that gun.
Santa:I'm not biting on any of the other part of your post! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
[This message has been edited by Ripsnort (edited 08-04-2000).]
-
Hmm,
Why is everyone afraid that the government is coming to get them? And why do think that you can fight off the goverment if they wanted your guns? Did owning fully automatic weapons help David Koresh? Did it help the S.L.A? Did it help the M.O.V.E. orginazation in my home city? All heavily armed with Illegal weapons and all dead by the oldest trick in the book, fire. Why do you think that keeping a pistol under your pillow is going to save you from the goverment?
Toad a car manufacturer isn't responsable for the practices of a car dealership but a gun manufacturer is supposed to only sell to properly licenced dealers. Also it took legislation to get car manufactures to make cars safer and it is taking the same ligslation to get the gun companies to move of their lazy rich asses.
10bears I don't think I want you dead but I also don't understand your post. The bottom line is might makes right. That's how Hitler came to power, that's why the Government will defeat it's citizens in an armed conflict. You want to get shot, go wave a gun around, you'll get shot.
TAC, your brother came to America and baught an advanced pistol in one week. Is that the sickest thing I have ever heard??
Colin Furguson did the same thing when he emigrated here. Then he got on the Long Island express Rail Road and shot almost 18 people. I bet that there families are happy about your rights. YOUR RIGHTS DO NOT SUPERCEED THE RIGHTS OF OTHERS TO SURVIVE.
If the laws in this country were not undermined illegally by paranoid gun owners and dealers meny of these crimes would not happen. Including Colimbine High School.
If you own a gun and are neglegent with who has access to it or who you give to or sell it too then you are assisting in a homocide.
If you give an automatic weapon to your teenage son and he kills someone then you are responsable, not for murder but for being criminally neglegent.
Toad, you have begun to speak in circles.
I have already said most prople that die in cars kill themselves. So subtract the number of people that die on their own. Also when they do kill someone it is an accident, not intentional. Thats why they call it manslaughter instead of murder. Now count your auto deaths. Cars are for driving and Guns are for Killing. All of you law abiding citizens are very selective as to what you consider to be the law. If it's a gun law you ingnore it. Guess what, then you are a criminal. When someone goes crazy at the post office they don't bring their Chevy to the office and run people over, they bring their gun. Guns are for killing and that's all.
Rip, I have also had a gun pulled on me. And if I to had a gun I probably would have tried to use it and I would probably be dead now. When you had your incident you didn't pull your weapon or didn't have it. Your wife had one but her attackers did not. Arn't you glad that they didn't. Do you want your wife to have a gun battle with armed thugs? What would that evening have been like for you if you had gotten a call from the police? The old man in your story would be free and safe today if he had bought a Doberman instead of that gun. There is always another way. If your afraid of the government then you have other issues but for personal safety there are better ways. And I am no pacifist.
Rip, I can at least talk to you I know.
Let me ask these questions because I just don't understand.
1.Why oppose safer Guns or gun locks?
2. Why no waiting period, 1 day on purchases?
3. Why no background checks at gun shows?
4. Where is your gun or Guns right now???
Later
F4UDOA
-
Originally posted by F4UDOA:
It's like this, you can kill someone with can opener if you want to right, so why not outlaw can openers? The obvious answer is that can openers were not meant to kill and guns are meant for. Too obvious though. Here is the more base reason. If you want to kill someone you have to get dirty. With a knife, bat or otherwise you have to get close and get messy. Most people, as much as we all like to talk toejam don't have the stomach for that type of behaivor. What a gun really does is make killing impersonal. It makes it easy and you don't have to even see the other persons face. It makes it a cold cowardly act. It also gives people the abilty to make mistakes that they just can't come back from. Once you pull a gun out you've got to do something because you have crossed the worlds largest line in the sand. I'm not talking about shooting ducks either. I mean people just like yourselves that react to a situtation like they think John Wayne would and they either get killed or kill someone that they would not otherwise have done.
I do believe you are wrong. These stats are from a few years ago, and I have to admit I haven't kept up on this as much as I used to.
The average distance between participants in a gunfight is 20-25ft. Average length of a gunfight is around 3 seconds. That's close enough to see the person's face.
Then you've got the people who'll stick a gun in your face on the street to mug ya, and the ones who rob convience stores then shoot the clerk for S&G*. Very clear view of faces here.
Guns dinnae make killing a person that impersonal. From a short distance it saves you from the splatter a baseball bat etc would get on you, and your target dies a little faster, but that's about it.
What you said about crossing a line is very true. You should never pull your gun unless you intend to use it. And if you do pull your gun and have to use it, shoot to kill.
There have been a few times I've been in a situation where I've needed my 1911A1. And each time I was prepared to shoot to kill and deal with the consequences later. And I'm not talking about legal consequences, there was no doubt it was a self defense situation (defense of another once). I'm talking about the personal, mental consequences.
There are ghosts in this world
and sometimes they come back
I can understand your concern about accidents. Alot of shootings in the US are accidental. This is where responsibility and education come in. I've been around guns for over 20 years. I've been personally handling guns for 17yr or so. In all that time only 1 of my guns has been involved in an accident, and it was a friend of mine not paying attention. He was comparing the feel of my Colt Trooper .357mag to his Ruger .44 single action (forget which model). I told im I was loading the .357, and I loaded the cylinder and set it on the table with the cylinder still open while I stood and got my rig on. My friend picks up my Colt, swings the cylinder shut (w/o looking DUH), twirls it on his finger twice, and pulls the hammer back as he stops it on the third rotation with me starting to yell "JOE IT'S LOADED!!!". Now this Colt has a single action trigger break of just under 3/4 of a lb, so I'm sure you can guess what came next. Yup, the report of a .357mag and a nice little hole in the cieling, followed very closely by me taking the Colt with my left hand and knocking the toejame out of him with me right. He broke rule #1, always treat a firearm as if it were loaded. And he pissed me off by not paying attention. I said I was loading it and left the cylinder open. To the safety concious these are billboards.
Joe is much more safety conscious these days. Along with several more of my friends. I've had a good number of friends aksing me to help them buy a gun that's right for them. I've even talked a few out of buying guns because I knew they weren't really to be a gun owner. And I warn'em that if I see them doing something unsafe I won't hesitate to knock the hell out of them and make'em do it right, and I've done that to several of them. Pisses them right off, but they never make the same mistake again (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
Hell I smacked one guy a friend brought over to the house cause he thought my collection was a buncha playtoys and he was treating them as such. And that is the problem with all the accidental shootings, which could be solved, for the most part, with proper education on safe firearm handling and storage.
-
From the Associated Press, in today's paper;
"Reno urges more study on gun law
..."An American Medical Association study released Wednesday found that murder and suicide rates dropped no faster than before in states that had to toughen their laws to comply with the 1984 Brady Act to regulate handguns. But after the act took effect, fewer people of age 55 and older used guns to kill themselves."
Well, there's a radical outfit, the AMA. Seems the Brady Law had no effect on murder rates in those states. At least the older folks didn't use guns as often for suicide. A benefit there but absolutely no effect on violent crime.
F4, then you want to take out all suicides "legitimate use of firearm" <police, etc.> and accidental deaths from the guns statistics as well, right? So we compare apples to apples? That would be a start, although I don't think a DUI guy killing a family in a minivan is an accident. I happen to think it's murder, but that's just me. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
Cars are for driving and guns are for killing? That's a pretty unbiased statement coming from a guy that's pretty clearly "gun-phobic". How about "cars are for driving and guns are for sport shooting...and EITHER one can be mis-used?" (Is shooting paper targets killing?)
But no...guns have NO PLACE in your society. ALL are bad.
But you don't want to confiscate them right? Just register? You never did answer that F4. Are you going to be satisfied with registration?
If we give in on registration, ballistic fingerprinting, owner training...will your crowd then come out and clearly state that the 2nd Amendment means exactly what it says? Will you say "NOW you may have guns, if these things are done. We will NEVER, EVER question the right to keep and bear arms again."
Nope. You won't. And we both know it. Your crowd will move right on towards confiscation.
If you drive your Chevy to the Post Office and gun people down, isn't GM an accessory? I bet there's a Trial Lawyer out there that would give that one a go!
It's not the PERSON, it's the inanimate objects that allow us to do evil!
Cain killed Able with a rock. Register ROCKS! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
I'm not afraid of my government; I'm afraid of you! My government is pretty reasonable..it's your crowd that's not.
I am breaking no laws, I am no threat to anyone, I use my firearms responsibly...but here you are foaming at the mouth against me for even having them. Why don't you turn your attention to the real problem?
It's not the inanimate object, it's the PERSON that's responsible. But that's too tough to do anything about right? Because it means SERIOUS changes to law enforcement, the judicial process and the prison system. It may even *gasp* require more capital punishment.
I don't oppose gun locks. Use them if you want to, they are already available. I don't oppose safer guns, either. Unfortunately, I suspect that some people's idea of a "safe gun" is one that is rendered incapable of use. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
I don't have a waiting period problem either. If they ever get one that works; right now, it doesn't. I suspect you haven't tried to buy a gun lately, so you probably don't know that the system simply does not work as advertised and nothing is being done to improve it.
Background checks at gun shows? Same problem; presently it just doesn't work and the Feds are unwilling to spend the money it would take to make it right.
Of course, as we've just seen, the AMA study says the Brady Law makes NO DIFFERENCE. Don't let that distract you from your crusade, however.
My guns right now are in an 800 lb steel safe, bolted with hardened bolts to a concrete slab floor.
Santa, getting a permit for concealed carry can be relatively straight forward or incredibly difficult, depending on where you live in the US. It's a matter that falls under local, not national jurisdiction.
In a place like Kansas, if you have a clean record you can get a concealed carry permit after a police investigation and approval by your local police chief.
In some other states, you need that and you have to show some sort of reasonable need. For example, you own a restaurant and routinely carry the proceeds to the bank night deposit after closing.
In still other states, it is almost impossible to get a carry permit. Most of the East coast/northeast corridor locales are like this. New York City is a prime example. They have about the toughest gun laws in the country...and one of the highest violent crime rates. Funny how that inverse relationship keeps showing up. Washington DC is exactly the same...toughest laws, highest violent crime rates. But watch, F4 will be able to explain that away, too. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Overall, what you will find is that where crime is low it's easy to get a permit. Where crime is high and you are in the greatest danger, the powers that be have decided that law-abiding citizens with clean records should NOT be allowed to carry. Makes perfect sense right?
In any event, concealed carry is a local situation. It just depends on where you live. In states where the gun has recently and historically had it's place as a simple, necessary tool, people don't get all worked up. Things seem to go along just fine. Most of the states West of the Mississippi are like this.
In states where the majority of the population is urban and folks are no longer in touch with the land, thinking that steaks are "born" on a styrofoam platter wrapped in plastic, it's a lot harder to get a permit.
And yes, the Constitution can be amended. Things can be added and subtracted. It's a pretty lengthy process though. It was deliberately set up by the founders to be that way. It sort of inhibits the fad of the moment, the thoughtless "quick fix" from being enacted into law.
The Supreme Court interprets the Constitution and that's another way to achieve change. So far, F4's bunch has been afraid to take the 2nd Amendment to the Supreme Court because they are afraid gun rights will be clearly reaffirmed for all time. It will eventually happen, I think.
-
Er.. cousin, not brother. And its not sick, its damn scary (what background check do you run on such a person eh?). BTW, my cousin is a cool and responsible guy, but the fact that he got such easy access to weaponry is what I wanted to point out here.
"YOUR RIGHTS DO NOT SUPERCEED THE RIGHTS OF OTHERS TO SURVIVE." Exactly. So why does the law allow others to get weapons that can potentially take the lives of others?
The NRA and other gun geeks are hiding behind a centuries old law that allowed citizens to bear arms... however, they seem to have purposely ignored that the law was written so that american citizens could arm and repel any invasion from Britain or any other hostile invader IN THOSE TIMES.
Personally, I hate guns. I've seen what they do and what people do with them. "Guns don't kill people, people kill people!" goes the NRA counter against the "Guns kill people" slogan. Well, the truth is, PEOPLE WITH GUNS KILL PEOPLE.
As a side note i'd like to add that the price of a paintball gun is about 200 to 400 dollars (a decent one). I went to a shooting range a while back (with you know who) and was amazed to see that I could buy a 9mm Carbine for $150!!!!!!!!!
-
Speaking as a member of the community from the UK the Tony Martin case stirred up a huge hornets nest when he was arrested. Just for the record Tony Martin lived in a very rural part of England, a community made up of small farm holdings that had suffered 100's of times from petty burgalry and vandalism. Tony Martin had already reported many events without any kind of reasonable response from the police, not even a simple patrol.
Fred Barras the kid that got shot (in the back as he ran) had already received many convictions for theft and burgalry but still persisted to break the law and play a lawful part in his comunity, his accompliss also had a string of offences to his name. Although a big deal was made about them being shot in the back the fact that Tony Martin and his defense still use is that it was pitch black in the house and the shot was fired as a warning shot. The thing that stuck in my throat so much over this whole affair were the gloating police officers at the press conference after Tony Martin's case declaring how justice had been done and how terrible Tony Martin was to take the laws into his own hands and that the law had not let down Fred Barras.....the law is the PEOPLE'S law, we elect a government to pass laws, to install a justice system, the PEOPLE pay for the police force to uphold the OUR law, its not theirs to do with as they see fit! the justice system DID let Fred Barras down, if they had punished him more severley early on in his criminal 'career' by either giving him a short sharp shock stint in a prison or young offenders insitute then perhaps he may not have been at Tony Martin's farm that fateful night, Freds family let him down..what were they doing letting him associate with this person, why had they not taken their own steps to try and steer Fred away from a life of crime? The justice system let someone down, that somebody was Tony Martin!
The only good thing to happen in this case to date is that Tony Martin has apparently been let out on bail to fight his conviction in court.
-
Toad,
Who is my crowd? I'm white an a veteren of the USAF. I can tell that your running out of places to go with your arguement because you are contradicting yourself. First the Goverment is going to confiscate all of your weapons and now your fine with the government. First your a law abiding citizen but then you don't want to hear about registering your gun. Guess what, it's the law. Register your guns or YOU ARE A CRIMINAL!!
Toad, why don't you finish the story by the associated press. I would luv to hear it all. Funny because in New Jersey were assualt weapons have been banned gun deaths have dropped considerably.
And yes believe it or not cars are for driving and guns are for killing. If you want to shoot paper plates so bad then why do you need cop killer bullets?? Are you shooting teflon plates?
You make it sound like "my people" are attacking you. Well it's my people that keep getting shot by your people. So your people are the ones out of control. I realize that you and 5 other little Toads live Kansas but in the real world there is a good chance of running into more than 2 people in one place.
EXPLAIN THIS<== IN your perfect world everyone is carrying a gun. On a crowded street with people all around one person pulls a gun on another person. The second party fires three shots in self defense. Two stray bullets hit passers buy and they retaliate with return fire causing a chain reaction of gunfire. Is this your plan??
You say that you are not oppsed to safer guns? Well if you are in the NRA then you do because the NRA boycotted Smith and Wesson for doing research into smart pistols.
FACT, so you do oppose safer guns.
If all of your weapons are in a giant safe
HOW are you supposed to defend yourself?? Do you watch to many movies? What do you think the number one item criminals look for in your house is? Your Gun!! They don't come at night when your waiting by your gun safe. They come when your not home.
You say many of your friends are cops. Me too. But what is different is that I have many friends that have done jail time as well. They laugh at people like you. You are on their side but your ego is to big to see it. Using a gun for self defense is a one in million chance.
Reality. Willow Grove PA. about two years ago. I'll give you the address so you can call them if you want. I lived about a mile away from this place. A GUN store is opening in the morning. Two armed gunmen grab the owner on his way into the store at 9:00AM.
The other owner iside was caught off gaurd as well. They were robbed of many weapons as well as money. The theives left from the back of the store instead of the front. The genious gun store owners decided to shoot it out with them as they left. Fired about a hundred rounds and hit Nothing. If the theives had left from the front of the store then the Gun store owners would have been shooting into a crowded taffic jam on Rt611 which runs in front of their store. So much for being armed and ready.
Toad you keep saying my people. Well I am a firm beliver in taking care of your own bussiness. If the NRA would police it's own house then you wouldn't have this problem. Fact is that they have flooded this country with weapons in the past 30yrs. At one time it was noble to own a firearm and protect your own. Now your just a Paranoid Scared little puppy holding on to his gun waiting for some minority to drive out to Kansas to steal all of your corn or something.
By the Way. I have repeatedly that GUNS are not evil. Evil is the wrong word. Gun owners, especially NRA members are Mentally incabable of being responsable for a fire arm. Your simply not that bright. Evil has nothing to do with it. Firts the government wants to get you, no my people want to get you. You are paranoid, armed and violent. That's the problem. Gun owners.
Guns could have a place in socioty if people would comply to the laws of the land. But gun dealers and owners are out of control.
Your obviously a republican. How to you justify the censorship of TV and the Radio of sexual material? How do you justify breaking the 1st amendment? How do you justify the Church and State conflict in the Republican party?? How about the anti abortion snipers shooting abortion doctors? Isn't that a violation of someones rights? You people can justify anything and your willing to kill to do it. And your worried about me. Please
F4UDOA
-
Show me in the Contitution where it says anything about seperation of Church and state. Then look at the money we spend all over the world it says IN GOD WE TRUST. As a veteran of the U.S Army and a long time gun owner (sence 11 years old) They can have my guns when they pry them from my cold dead fingers. And about that town in Georgia I believe they have a Zero crime rate there alos antoher town I believe its in airizona there is (or was) a law that all adults would carry a gun (residents only) also zero crime rate.(its in one of those NRA magezines.
I live for two years on an Airforce base the training you guys get in weapons was not only a joke but totaly useless.
Nuff said.
-
1.Why oppose safer Guns or gun locks?
2. Why no waiting period, 1 day on purchases?
3. Why no background checks at gun shows?
4. Where is your gun or Guns right now???
Most of the gun laws proposed I do not have a problem with, but you know the old cliche, "Give them an inch and they'll take a mile"..this is our Gov't.
-
They've passed a national law saying we have to register our guns? I missed that one
Last I checked registration was pretty much a local thing. When we lived at NSB King's Bay, in housing, I had to register my weapons with base police/security. It was even joking said if something ever happened they'd draft me into the ASF (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
But I dinnae have to keep them in the armory, they stayed under lock and key in my own house, and someone would come check every so often to see how they were stored and if I still had all of them.
-
Whew Santa...
I'll post after I take a break.. had to shoot my way into the office today.. of course I live in the west... I was almost late... had to take my ak47 in for servicing.. It must be great living in your hermetically sealed, homogenous country with every other country protecting you guys...
Lay off the USA...
-
F4,
You are foaming, bud..breathe deep.
Go back over my posts, you're getting confused and you are misquoting me. For example, I have never said any of my friends are cops. That was Rip, I believe.
I haven't said the government is going to try to confiscate my guns. I said people like YOU are trying to get the government to confiscate my guns. Big difference. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
Gun registration currently is NOT the law. Maybe in Jersey, but not here. Get your facts straight, amigo. None of my guns have to be "registered", other than the paper work you fill out when you buy a new one. I haven't bought a new one in a long time. Most of mine were purchased long before that paperwork was required.
Why don't you go to the AP site, clip the article and post it? I gave you the lead..the rest is about the same. Do a little work yourself.
I don't have any teflon coated bullets. Foam on, dude! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif) BTW, are you aware of the current situation with those? Thought not.
...and I have never said everyone in my perfect world should carry a gun. In fact, I agree with Cave...there are some law-abiding citizens that just can't handle it. For sure, repeat criminals shouldn't get them.
But I do love the whacko scenarios you create in your mind! Just like that .50 cal sniper rifle thing...did ya ever find EVEN ONE INSTANCE of one being used in a crime? Thought not.
No, I don't support every position that the NRA has taken. Do you support every position that your favorite politician has taken?
Thought not. The NRA has its problems...but right now, it's my best hope against people that can't see guns as tools and criminals as criminals. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
I'm a Republican? LOL! F4, you're really great at expounding on things you know absolutely nothing about. I'm willing to kill for any reason? Man, the spit must be flying as you type! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif) When did we meet, anyway? You apparently know all about me.
So, come on, cut to the point...if we register, ballistic fingerprint, background check, ad nauseum...
Are you going to stop? Will you agree to and vouchsafe our rights to own and use guns in a traditional sporting manner?
Well, F4? This is the third time I've asked, have you got the guts to answer?
-
I could go on at extreme length about why the United States of America appears so messed up.
The short answer is that it IS messed up. The long answer is that it has NOTHING to do with guns or who owns em.
To my European relatives: Your glad you dont live in the USA and so am I (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
To my English fathers: I look at you and I see what I could be and Im glad I aint, but I *still* love you with the heart of a son <S>.
Kevin "Yeager" Hall
------------------
(http://www.geocities.com/tas13th/sqsig/yeager.gif)
[This message has been edited by Yeager (edited 08-04-2000).]
-
Here ya go, F4...figured you were too busy wiping the foam off your keyboard to go find this.
BTW, you are really doing a great job of making the gun owners on this board look like the crazy ones!
Keep posting...PLEASE! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Reno urges caution, more research, after Brady Law study
August 3, 2000
Web posted at: 5:28 PM EDT (2128 GMT)
WASHINGTON (AP) -- More studies are necessary on the effectiveness of the Brady background check law, but "it makes common sense" to deny guns to people who shouldn't have them, Attorney General Janet Reno said Thursday.
An American Medical Association study released Wednesday found that murder and suicide rates dropped no faster than before in states that had to toughen their laws to comply with the 1994 Brady Act to regulate handguns. After the act took effect, however, fewer people 55 and older used guns to kill themselves.
"We're willing to say that we need to do more study here," Reno told a news conference. "We are getting better at evaluating what works and what doesn't work. We're getting better at identifying crime problems, but we must continue to do everything we can to make it as exact as we can."
Reno noted that authors of the report acknowledged they didn't study the Brady Act's indirect impact on what is known as the secondary gun market -- gun sales by unlicensed dealers. That, experts say, is the source of a significant number of weapons used in crimes.
Reno said "it makes common sense" to keep guns out of the hands of criminals, and the law "must have some affect in terms of the dissemination of guns throughout the community."
Copyright 2000 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Reno said "it makes common sense" to keep guns out of the hands of criminals,...
Well, DUH!
Maybe there is some intelligent life in DC! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
-
Sorry guys, this is my fault, I was hoping we could have a civil debate on gun control laws in the U.S. but this is turning into a bash thread. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/frown.gif) I guess we're not the adults we thought we were...
-
Sorry Ripsnort,
I am very zealious when it comes to certain things and sometimes I need to take a step back and take a breath. This is why I do not own a gun. You can imagine what this conversation would turn into if we were all in a room.
Anyway this is my last post in this thread as I am not really enjoying this convesation much right now anyway. I will just finish by quoting some of what Toad has just posted.
Reno noted that authors of the report acknowledged they didn't study the Brady Act's indirect impact on what is known as the secondary gun market -- gun sales by unlicensed dealers. That, experts say, is the source of a significant number of weapons used in crimes.
Toad,
What was I saying about gun dealers being responsable for gun crimes? And the gun companies that sell to these potatos?
I guess it depends on what your idea of a criminal is because you start identifying who should have gun.
F4UDOA
-
Originally posted by Yeager:
Snipped-
The short answer is that it IS messed up. The long answer is that it has NOTHING to do with guns or who owns em.
Kevin "Yeager" Hall
On that note, I end my last post with the fact that 3 of us growing up, with 21 firearms, some loaded, leaning in the corner of the closet, never once harmed any of us. We knew better(Parents spending time with kids, talking to them, explaining to them, what a concept!). When we were old enough, we were taught on to use them properly and attended gun training classes.We were taught to never go into that closet unless someone broke into the house while we were at home. We respected those guns as much as we feared them.
As a Columbine victim asked Pres.Clinton on a national TV program.."Mr.President, with all due respect, but when was the last time a gun jumped up off a desk and shot someone by itself??" The moderator moved onto the next question, since the 10 seconds of silence was deafening.
[This message has been edited by Ripsnort (edited 08-04-2000).]
-
FOURTH TIME, F4.......
So, come on, cut to the point...if we register, ballistic fingerprint, background check, ad nauseum...
Are you going to stop? Will you agree to and vouchsafe our rights to own and use guns in a traditional sporting manner?
Well? Or are you going to cut and run from the board now?
Next, please read what you posted...
"secondary gun market -- gun sales by unlicensed dealers"
An unlicensed dealer is breaking the law? We both agree? OK, good..then these would be criminals right? What have I said about criminals?
Now, the gun companies that sell to these potatos? (If you can find one. The Feds have really cracked down here thank goodness, but do you have an example?) They are also breaking the law? We both agree? OK, good..then these would be criminals right? What have I said about criminals?
I think I've been totally consistent on differentiating between criminals and people who obey the law.
Rip, you did not do ANYTHING wrong in starting this thread in the 0-Club. That's what it's for and I'm a firm believer that _talking_ about this stuff is a GOOD thing. Anyway, I have thoroughly enjoyed it...especially the part where I'm identified as one who, if I may paraphrase "can justify anything and is willing to kill to do it."
I enjoy stuff like that from people who live 1500 miles from me and have never met me. Shows their unbiased, balanced view of the situation. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Besides, I think F4 is doing more for the cause of law-abiding gun owners than anyone I've seen in the last 6 months!! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
-
Originally posted by indian:
Show me in the Contitution where it says anything about seperation of Church and state. Then look at the money we spend all over the world it says IN GOD WE TRUST. As a veteran of the U.S Army and a long time gun owner (sence 11 years old) They can have my guns when they pry them from my cold dead fingers. And about that town in Georgia I believe they have a Zero crime rate there alos antoher town I believe its in airizona there is (or was) a law that all adults would carry a gun (residents only) also zero crime rate.(its in one of those NRA magezines.
I live for two years on an Airforce base the training you guys get in weapons was not only a joke but totaly useless.
Nuff said.
Yup, check Kinnesaw's crime rate. I was talking to someone in the arena last night on RW (forgive me for forgetting, it was a combat zone (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif) ) who said they work in Kinnesaw and that law still stands.
I seem to recall that GA was one of the first states to allow concealed carry license holders to be exempt from the Brady law (tougher check to get the CC permit than a standard Brady check IMO).
-
F4UDOA, toad is pro-gun so you call him violent, bigoted and a murderer. Then you say he supports censorship and anti-abortion snipers. And "your people" are getting shot by "his people"!!??
Scary stuff man.
I hope u just said those things in the heat of the moment. Apparantly you might even shoot at someone if u had a gun in such a heated argument.
Do you really mean what you say here or is it just alot hot-headed emotional bull?
-
Originally posted by F4UDOA:
Sorry Ripsnort,
I am very zealious when it comes to certain things and sometimes I need to take a step back and take a breath. This is why I do not own a gun. You can imagine what this conversation would turn into if we were all in a room.
I'm also very zealous and passionate when it comes to things I believe in very strongly. It downright pisses me off the attitude that some anti-gunners have, and it seems you lean towards that attitude F4U. The ban'em all-take'em-melt'em all down attitude. Not quite there, but you're close. You still seem to support having the government infringe on my rights.
Find some victims of accidental shootings and ask them if proper education about storage and handling would have prevented thier accident. If they can take an emotionless look at the incident 95% will tell you yes. Matter of fact, I'll step up and be the first to tell you that proper education on handling would've prevented an accident. I've got an entry and exit scar from a 9mm Parabellum on me right calf. Careless handling on the part of one of my best friends. Yes, we're still friends, and yes, I beat the toejam out of him 2 days later. Been almost 5yr and to this day he hasn't repeated any of his carelessness (he was one of the tougher ones to teach).
This wound has given me a damn good example to use in this kind of debate. As soon as I got home from the hospital one of my friends says "so you gonna sell all your guns now?" My response was to pick up me 1911A1, make sure the mag was seated, rack the slide, snick on the safety and set it beside me on the nightstand.
I've said that not law abiding person needs a gun. Some people just aren't cut out to be responsible gun owners. People like I do my best to talk out of buying a gun, no matter how badly they want one. One could say I take an anti-gunner's position with these people, and I guess I do. I know the ins and outs of gun ownership, and it's a mantle I wear with pride. Like I said, 17yr of handling guns and only had 1 of my weapons involved in 1 accident. I've been the victim of an accident, and I'm still 100% pro gun. Like that person asked slick Willy: "When's the last time a gun jumped up off a desk and shot someone by itself?"
As for this secondary gun market... I guess private sales are to outlawed? What if Toad wanted to buy a gun from me? We're both law abiding and responsible gun owners. Are we to be made to pay for the irresponsible actions of some people?
Anyone got any stats on how many guns are in circulation compared to how many gun deaths/yr (not counting suicide, you're not stopping someone who's serious about committing it,they'll use pills, jump, razor blade, whatever)? Just wondering what the ratio is.
Yeager yes, this country has problems, and yes, contrary to politically correct views guns have absolutely nothing to do with the problem. They're tools being used, and by thier nature are high visibility items, so they catch the blame. Everything after that statement though, IMO, serves no purpose save trying to turn this into a full blown flame war. BTW, when ya gonna pay the US back for all the help in rebuilding after the War? Bash us if ya want, but head for Hang's ugly american thread, it has no place in here.
Rip it's amazing what proper teaching and upbringing can do ain't it? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
My brother and I hated each other times, and the fights we've gotten into are more than enough proof of that. But never once did we think of grabbing one of the guns, we just jumped up and went the other one again.
Bottom line: You can have my guns when ya pry'em from me cold, dead fingers. In the mean time, I'll be doing all I can to educate fellow gun owners (who need it) on proper storage and handling to do my part (more than?) to cut down on accidental shootings.
When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.
Guess it's gettin time to saddle up and skin out
-
BTW, in all my debates with anti-gunners I've never lost my cool. But some of them have become so enraged from either my staying cool, my points of logic, or both, that they have physically attacked me. Quick side step and footsweep to send'em into the nearest wall usually takes the fight out of them, and if not friends that are present jump in and hold'em back. One even continued to try to get to me after he saw I was wearing my piece and told me he'd kill me. I just smiled and kept my cool.
And people say I shouldna own a gun
-
Originally posted by CavemanJ:
As for this secondary gun market... I guess private sales are to outlawed?
Cave, I suspect you already know that "dealers" are already clearly defined in the Federal gun laws. Licensed dealers are pretty easy to define. Secondary market dealers are a different situation. However, if you read the regs, they are reasonably <although not totally> clear.
I was giving F4 the benefit of the doubt, assuming he knows the difference. This may or may not be the case. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
As I am sure you know, a single gun transaction between two private owners does not require any sort of dealer's license nor is it in any way, shape or form against the Federal law.
I'm sure this causes the "antis" a great amount of heartburn as well.
However, until they address our primary issue, that they provide iron-clad guarantees that our right to keep and use firearms in a traditional sporting manner is not going to be infringed....we will never be able to come to reasonable compromises on any of their issues.
I believe the ball is in their court. Compromise is possible IF they are willing to give up the "confiscation" they seem so bent on eventually enforcing.
I've asked F4 four different times to make that statement. Because he's probably an honorable fellow, he can't bring himself to do it, apparently.
I have NEVER met an "anti" that could. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
F4UDOA,
You seriously scare the livin hell out of me!
Still, in the arena Im ok with you (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
====
Cave,
Do not forget, for every Ugly American, there are a dozen Ugly Frenchmen (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
In my world, owning a firearm is equivalent to owning a coffeemaker. In the wrong hands both are lethal, but in my hands both are useful and I will not stand to be denied the lawful use of either!
Yeager
------------------
(http://www.geocities.com/tas13th/sqsig/yeager.gif)
[This message has been edited by Yeager (edited 08-04-2000).]
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort:
Sorry guys, this is my fault, I was hoping we could have a civil debate on gun control laws in the U.S. but this is turning into a bash thread. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/frown.gif) I guess we're not the adults we thought we were...
(I have not yet read the whole thread, so I don't know about the bashing)
If this thread was about US gun laws, then it started a bit strangely - with an example from UK. The quoted part (in the first message of this thread) though certainly seemed like being re-written in USA?
From what I read from the news, it seems that USA has a kind of free shooting gallery for house owners/property owners etc. For example, a lost exchange student with inadequate knowledge of english language gets shot while asking directions...just because he 'trespassed'.
As an European I can understand why the person mentioned in the example got a life sentence (if he ever got it - could be an urban legend). Shooting someone with a shotgun from a close range is deadly. You know it is deadly. When you fire at a person, even if he is a burglar, you know what you are doing. Probability of serious injury or death is high.
So basically, property in USA is more valuable than lives - in the sense that you are allowed to defend your property with deadly force.
On the other hand, guns are so abundant in USA that most assailants are probably carrying one. Maybe that kind of makes it OK for every amateur to carry a gun for "self defense"?
I know I should not touched this subject...but still. I've tried it once before on Usenet a few years ago - got abusive E-mail for about 6 months from various pro-shooting-everything-that-moves-or-looks-like-a-target -groups.
I hope this AH group is more reasonable.
And yes: I do not own any firearms and do not plan to. I do know how to operate,fire,field strip,maintain etc. various civilian and military weapons from 1930s era rifles and pistols to modern assault rifles and infantry weapons. I do not need to have any, though.
-
Let me describe the gun laws and situation in Finland. It is certainly somewhat different from USA. Some details are probably incorrect, but the general picture should be OK.
- you need a license for a firearm. You get the license from the police
- to get a license, you need to have proof of membership of a shooting club/hunting club and have recommendation from a club official (not necessarily needed for .22 weapons)
- you need to have a trigger lock and/or a locked weapons cabinet. Guns need to be placed in the cabinet / be locked at all times (or be dismantled)
- it is more difficult to get licenses for 'short' weapons (easily concealed) that rifles & shotguns.
- automatic&semi automatic weapons licenses require long term commitment to voluntary reserve organisations etc.
Of course there are some exceptions. Of course the standards vary around the country. Of course the criminals and some ordinary people have illegal guns.
AFAIK Finland has the largest number of private firearms in the EU.
-
I've noticed that gun owners who have had friends who made a mistake with guns beat the crap out of their friends. ;D
So much for non violent normal people (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
Me, I know my friends ain't infallible. A uy packed my chute, did it wrong and I had a bag lock (bag the chute is in wouldn't open, so you're streaming with a small bag over yer head, full speed towards ground). Fortunately, after three or four seconds it opened, by which time my hands where firmly on the cutaway and reserve chute handles.
He apologized profusely, but I didn't think too much about it - it was a mistake, not on purpose. And he was an ex Royal Marine and much bigger than me (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif).
Most killings are killings of passion - someone loses their temper and the result is a tragedy. Whether you consider the puropse of guns to be purely recreational such as target shooting, or them as tools of death, meant to kill primarily doesn't matter. In terms of power, a gun is much stronger than a knife. A weak 90lb woman has an equalizer against a karate kung fu master. It allows you to carry through an intent to harm while minimizing the risk to yourself. If the other guy has a gun, it is a matter of who has it p first, and skill of course, but I talk about the statistical mean normal kind of gun owner.
Many things can be used to bring death or harm to another human being. A handgun is just an extremely convenient and effective such tool. More effective than knives, cigarrettes, rocks or cars.
To me, most handguns are made for defense, i.e "peace through superior firepower". Detterants. But, they deter by their ability to kill, not by their cool looks. One could argue that the detterant effect is proportional to the lethality of the gun (which has many factors to it, I know).
For target shooting, you do not need a high capacity modern handgun like the Glock 17. More fun, maybe, but if it is target shooting, guns dedicated to this are more precise due to ergonomic fit and whatnot. And such guns could be stored in gun clubs instead of the home..
I guess what I am getting at is that I do not buy the"target shooting" argument. The fun argument I do. I am not sure I buy the "guns are not made for killing" argument either, not with modern handguns. They deter because they are effective killing/maiming tools.
This of course has nothing to do with the second amendment and I am not recommending anything about whether handguns in the US should be banned or not.
If, as Ripsort wishes, we are to have a rational discussion about it, we gotta look at purpose and how well the purpose is met, and with what side effects it has. Many of you are much more well read than me on the subject, so I'll just finally leave some of my thoughts.
Purpose of handguns in the USA:
a) defense against an opressive government
Have no argument against this one, other than I think it is unlikely that the American government will attack the American people, or that the American people would allow it to happen *by peaceful means*. Americans aren't dumb at all. They're just opportunist dweebs. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
b) personal defense/defense of property/loved ones
This to me seems like the strongest and most viable argument for allowing guns. Here we must see how likely it is you will need to defend yourself with the gun, and what side effects owning a gun has. Crimes of passion would fall into this category. I do not have the numbers, so will leave it at this.
c) second amendment/rights
In almost all other western country, guns are considered a public health issue, and gun ownership is a priviledge, not a right. Not so in the USA. The intent of the second amendment can be discussed; did the forefathers intend that every American civilians should have the right to bear arms, or did they wish for it to be limited to militas, which any American can be a part of? Furthermore, could they foresee the rapid development the American society has been through, ethically, morally and technogically? Is the second amendment in a certain sense obsolete and in need of (grin) an amendment?
d) target shooting/recreational shooting
I've briefly ventured into the area above and have little to add, other than the "fun vs harm" equaion seems to be the proper one to use. An analogy that might be flawed would be me riding a very loud HD - fun for me, but harmful to the environment and other people's hearing, not to mention annoying.
We've got the right to free speech, but not the right to unnecessarily yell "FIRE!" in an overfilled cinema. Are there such considerations to be made about gun ownership?
Just a few thoughts to spark off a serious debate.
Cave, please do't beat the crap outta me if you disagree (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif). And remind me not to make stupid dangerous mistakes when near you.
<S!>
------------------
StSanta
JG54 "Grünherz"
-
Daff, (whos from UK and probably more familiar with this case) said one (maybe both?) assailants were shot in the back.
This is where he messed up. Hard to claim to be defending yourself if the "attacker" has his back to you.
Don't shoot someone in the back, it's murder.
-
I'll participate in this one; reasonable would be a nice change. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
...but not for a while.
I'm all worn out from that last totally bizarre debate that just went on. I swear, every time I read one of his later posts the foam was dripping down the INSIDE of my monitor glass. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
In the mean time, here are a few web sites that deal with the 2nd Amendment. I'm sure you can find more with a search engine. These may help our European Opportunist Friends (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif) and undecided US citizens understand a bit more of just what this argument is all about.
Highly Recommended:
http://www.2ndlawlib.org/ (http://www.2ndlawlib.org/)
http://www.guncite.com/ (http://www.guncite.com/)
Good:
http://www.saf.org/Constitutions.html (http://www.saf.org/Constitutions.html)
Interesting: http://apachego.com/rights/ (http://apachego.com/rights/)
If we're going to discuss it, we all might as well be familiar with the basis for the discussion.
If you are truly interested, the first two sites can keep you reading for hours. There are some very interesting direct quotes from our "founding fathers" that leave no doubt as to the intent of the 2nd Amendment...no matter how much the Politically Correct would like you to believe otherwise.
Knowledge is a good thing...enjoy!
Oh, btw..here's something from the Swiss Embassy on their laws.
http://www.swissemb.org/legal/html/gun_ownership.html (http://www.swissemb.org/legal/html/gun_ownership.html)
[This message has been edited by Toad (edited 08-04-2000).]
[This message has been edited by Toad (edited 08-04-2000).]
-
Santa the only one I ever beat the crap out of was the one who accidentily shot me. And that was more because I was pissed than he shot me than over the safety issue. Not the right reason, but it felt good to let it all out. And to his credit, he dinnae fight back, so I dinnae whoop him too bad. I think he beat himself up enough, partially because the next day he returned that particular firearm.
All the others just get a good, solid, open-handed squeak-slap. I find that will drive home the most important points faster than all the talking the world. Especially when they've made the same mistake twice and were told about it the first time. Guns aren't toys. I learned the hard way, and when I made the same mistake twice I got slapped hard for it. I learned the proper respect for firearms early on, and back when it wasn't illegal to actually punish/discipline your kids (but that's a whole different, though related, story).
-
Rock> Shooting someone in the back in broad daylight would pretty much be grounds for murder but its not so black and white as you think Rock.
As I said in my post above (sorry you guys did'nt see if while you were squabbling) the house was in total darkness, Tony Martin was an eccentric recluse who did not use the whole house and hardly used any electricity, he fired a warning shot into the darkness and it hit Fred Barras. How would you feel if like Tony Martin you felt the police had deserted you to such an extent that he actually booby-trapepd his home by removing things such as steps on his stairwell to protect himself, how would you feel if the police had all but turned their back on your rural community because it meant a long drive from their cosy police station?
The majority of the population in the UK wholeheartedly support Tony Martin because we are sick and tired of an ineffectual police force using soft target cases like Tony Martin to bolster their conviction records instead of getting out on the street and combating the people who constantly live on the wrong side of a lawful society. I don't know where you live but here in the UK its rare these days to see a police officers out on the street, even in Cardiff where I live which is a medium sized city its rare to see them.
-
Cave:
I hear ya, man (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) Was just yanking yer chain (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif).
------------------
StSanta
JG54 "Grünherz"
-
It's not what I feel. It's what I've read about similar cases in the US.
I don't know all the details of this case, just what's been posted here. From what's posted this one seems to fit the same pattern.
Someone breaks into your store/home. You grab a gun to defend yourself. I mean defend against bodily harm, not defend a TV or VCR.
If the burglar/robber then retreats, you have successfully defended yourself and better stop right there. If not you are committing a new crime much worse than robbery and will probably end up being Buba's new bride.
I'm not sure how the LAW feels about removing steps but, booby-traps are a no-no.
Don't go and tie one end of a string to a door and the other end to a shotgun. Don't go and make a high(deadly) voltage(this will keep his punk bellybutton out) device. Again, you'll probably end up being Buba's favorite HO.
BTW, what does this have to do with gun control anyway. I can easily think of a dozen ways to kill without a gun.
-
Originally posted by F4UDOA:
Toad,...Your obviously a republican. How to you justify the censorship of TV and the Radio of sexual material?
F4UDOA
I'm sorry, but I just couldn't resist revisiting this thread now that Gore has named his Vice Presidential running mate.
F4, am I now to understand that Lieberman is actually a REPUBLICAN in disguise? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif) (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
That's the trouble with generalizations, isn't it? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
-
As some kind of an update on the original subject....
Apparently one of the families of the thieves, Victims (Call them what you want) are now threatening to sue Tony Martin for "Loss of income"!!!!! (Presumably they are finding it hard to make ends meet since the untimely death of thier thieving little toejam of an offspring and the shortage of ill gotten gains he used to bring home).
I don't support the possesion of guns personally as I think that it is to easy for untrained persons (Children etc) to cause injury or death unintentionally, (Please, it's just an opinion, I don't want to start a flame war with the responsible gun owners out there) but as a victim of both property and car crime I now sleep better at night knowing I have a sword (A relic from an earlier "fencing hobby") within easy reach and be assured that if you are against a wall with it pressing in your chest it's no accident.
Just my 2c worth
TTFN
snafu